Rob Myers wrote: > On 01/07/11 09:43, Tobias Knerr wrote: >> >> The only motivation for data SA I can somewhat understand is to open up >> data that can be contributed back to OSM. > > Sharealike is meant to guarantee that the individual users of the > produced work have the same freedom to work with the data as the person > who produced it did.
I suppose you mean that they get access to the producers own, up-to-then proprietary, data? If no data except publicly available databases under ODbL (such as OSM) or an ODbL-compatible license (such as SRTM) was used to create the derivative database, and subsequently the product, then individual users already *have* the same freedom as the producer. They, like the producer, can use these original, publicly available databases. And this will likely be the case for a vast majority of OSM-based products, if current uses of OSM are any indication. ODbL would be a lot less cumbersome if we could limit the share alike requirement to those derivative databases that contain unique data, i.e. are *not* calculated from public, ODbL compatible, data sources. > Any gifts to the *project* that result from this freedom are a side-effect. You are right, share alike can work well even if no data ever flows back to the project. I shouldn't have neglected that aspect. But like the OSM community, other data users benefit primarily when they gain access to unique data that was not publicly available before. -- Tobias Knerr _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
